The WTO
Dispute Settlement Body, on 1 February 2001, adopted the panel report
on US anti-dumping measures on Korean steel products and established a
panel to examine a US complaint about Brazil's measures affecting
patent protection.

NOTE:
This summary has been prepared by the WTO
Secretariats Information and Media Relations
Division to help public understanding about developments
in WTO disputes. It is not a legal interpretation of the
issues, and it is not intended as a complete account of
the issues. These can be found in the reports themselves
and in the minutes of the Dispute Settlement Bodys
meetings.

Status
reports: Surveillance of implementation of recommendations
adopted by the DSB

The
European Communities presented its status report on the new banana
import regime, based on a “first come — first served” system
(see document WT/DS27/51/Add.15). Part of this new regime will be
formally adopted shortly, said the EC. Colombia, Honduras, Guatemala,
Panama, Jamaica, St Lucia, Ecuador, Costa Rica, expressed concern at
the impact the new system would have on their banana exports.

Japan
(document WT/DS76/11/Add.11) announced that all technical questions
had been resolved and that only one administrative issue remained.

Case DS103:
Canada — Measures affecting the importation of milk and
the exportation of dairy productsBack
to top

Canada
(document WT/DS103/12/Add.6) reminded the members that the
implementation period had ended on 31 January 2001 and confirmed that
it had implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB. New
Zealand, however, argued that through its new measures recently put in
place to implement the DSB recommendations, Canada continued to export
subsidized dairy products. The United States said that it did not
consider that Canada has brought its export regime for dairy products
into compliance with its export subsidy obligations.

Case DS90:
India — Quantitative restrictions on imports of
agricultural, textile and industrial productsBack
to top

India
(document WT/DS90/16/Add.5) repeated its intention to implement by the
deadline of 1 April 2001.

Turkey
(document WT/DS34/12/Add.5) informed the DSB that Turkish authorities
had arrived at a highly advanced stage in their endeavour to find the
most appropriate solution. India reminded the DSB that the
implementation period expires on 19 February 2001 and that this was
therefore the last meeting before implementation was due. India
requested more details of the progress made. India also reiterated its
concern regarding the restrictions reportedly imposed by the Turkish
authorities on imports of fabric from India.

Brazil
expressed its concern about Canada's announcement on 10 January 2001
concerning a new loan to be granted to its aircraft producer
Bombardier in an attempt to match Brazil's financing offers made to
win a contract from a US regional aircraft, Air Wisconsin.

Brazil
argued that the new Canadian export subsidies were really unilateral
retaliatory measures. Brazil announced that it had requested
consultations with Canada concerning this issue (WT/DS222/1).

Canada
responded that its intention was to provide, for one specific
transaction, financing on the same terms that Brazil was now using to
support the sales of its aircraft producer Embraer. Canada also said
it retained full right to apply sanctions (suspension of concessions)
against Brazil as authorized by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body on 12
December 2000.

Since
this was the second request from the United States, the DSB
automatically agreed to establish a panel to hear this case. Dominican
Republic, Honduras, India and Japan reserved third party rights.

The
US complains that Brazil discriminates the availability of patents and
the enjoyment of patent rights on the basis of whether products are
imported or locally produced.

The
European Commission, on behalf of Belgium, blocked the US' first
request (document WT/DS210/2) for the establishment of a panel, saying
that the request did not indicate clearly the trade measures at stake.